Have you ever heard a pre-takeoff safety briefing? If the pilot decides to depressurize the cabin, you will have this truly inconspicuous clue of oxygen masks dropping from the panels above the passengers' heads throughout the entire cabin, so they will definitely notice something is off. Nothing they can do, though, as the chemical generators are capable of sustaining them for around 15 minutes and their supply will run out long before the pilot's.

Preemption – as long as the Congress says the feds can do it, the state cannot do anything.

Exit nodes can see all the data going through them, but they do not know where that data originates from. If you use TLS on top of the Tor circuit, it is unlikely that the exit node can figure out who you are. To do so would require the exit node to also control your entry node and to run a sophisticated timing attack; unsurprisingly, Tor takes measures to guard against it. Exits are also regularly probed for malicious behaviour like traffic sniffing and banned from the network if caught doing that.

Great reading comprehension there. You just missed the following insignificant part: Around a third of leading machine learning and AI specialists who have left the UK's top institutions are currently working at Silicon Valley tech firms. If you add the more than a tenth [... at] North American universities and the nearly a tenth [... at] other smaller US companies to the third who have left for Silicon Valley, you can sort of understand why the British would be concerned. Losing fifty percent of AI researchers leaving the British academia to the U.S. means you are not exactly competitive.

You sort of do if an extremely powerful and under-regulated industry has convinced your parents to feed you copious quantities of sugar, hence giving you obesity well before you have been given the necessary information to make informed diet choices. If the couch potatoes responsible for putting you on the syrup teat have also failed to convey the importance of exercise to you for years, you must be truly exceptional to improve your diet, start exercising, and overcome obesity without any help whatsoever.

Sure, but in that case they either obtain a Master's from one of the DoD postgraduate institutions or receive further on-the-job training that does not add up to a college education, just like similar internal on-the-job training in the private sector does not constitute a college education.

Because they do not comprise four years of education? The federal service academies count as college, the rest is just vocational training.

Mandatory filters for microfibres in washing machines. Scientists studying plastic pollution want them introduced; the industry obviously does not because of the cost. (Clothes also serve a fundamental need of maintaining body temperature; the same cannot be said for glitter.)

Automatic dependent surveillance – broadcast. It is more benign than it sounds: just spend your days keeping an eye on your local air traffic (the transponder-equipped kind).

Neither of you has the better perspective on your own because alone both of you lack a control to compare yourselves to. Only together do your experiences acquire comparability and meaningfulness, and for any inferences drawn to be significant, we need to take lots of one of you (no degree during early career) and lots of the other of you (degree during early career). Anecdotes are useless for drawing inferences about the worth of something.

Why should we want to preserve the system? I would rather have my tax money spent on enabling people to give up meaningless jobs and paint, sing, dance, write, garden, hike, bike, paddle, or do whatever else floats their boat instead.

According to the original source, the per train savings would be 1,200,000 INR/yr. That's about 16,200 €/yr or 18,700 $/yr. Seems fairly OK for 21,000 l of diesel. The editor or submitter just cannot convert currencies, but that's no surprise.

There is a major difference between sexual harassment and student activism: you have no constitutional right to sexually harass other people; on the grounds of a public university open to the public, students do have the First Amendment right to assemble and speak.

It is perfectly possible to believe the victim and treat them with due sensitivity while not treating the alleged assailant any differently until they have been found guilty by a jury of their peers in a court of law. Even if the alleged assailant is cleared, there is no reason to disbelieve the victim: the recollection and interpretation of events can vary wildly from one person to next, and it is possible to feel violated even if the other person's conduct was legal and they truly had no way of knowing that you did not consent any more.

By way of example, consider a couple who always engage in intercourse doggy style. They are not into making noise: she just likes to quietly smile, he likes to tell her cute things, and they have always abided by the principles of enthusiastic consent. This has been their routine for a while, so he is not concerned about her being quiet. The time comes when he thinks up a new comment, but instead of the comment making her smile more, it causes her to freeze up: it has triggered memories of past traumatic experience and she feels scared, in danger, maybe about to die, and totally unable to communicate. She definitely does not want to have intercourse any more. He knows none of it: to him, she appears as she always has during their romps, and for all he knows, she is quietly smiling. At some point they finish and he realizes that something is wrong. What happens depends on the strength of their bond, but she would not be wrong if she lost all trust in him and considered herself to have been raped. However, considering their usual lack of communication, his conduct would not have been unreasonable, and there would clearly have been no intent on his part to assault her. A jury would be unlikely to convict him and there would be little reason to treat him as a dangerous monster, yet you could still believe she has been raped, fully empathize with her, and understand if she never wanted to see him again.

(Yes, the above is an example of bad communication between a couple, but believe it or not, most people are bad at communication.)